This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Rituximab does in the body
Used for lymphomas and immune diseases involving a type of white blood cell.
B cells wear a badge called CD20. Rituximab is an antibody that grabs the badge and marks that cell for destruction by three different mechanisms at once. Blood stem cells do not wear the badge, so the B cell population is wiped out and then rebuilt from scratch over the following six to twelve months, often without the disease coming back with it.
What happened in people
Just under half of 166 people with returning low-grade lymphoma responded to four weekly infusions.
✓ Reviewed first-read answer
Where this came from
A person wrote this and a reviewer approved it against this exact record. It carries no effect size.
A reviewer approved this against this record. The reviewed-claim record carrying the exact population and effect size does not exist yet.
No source is stored against this line.
The limit that matters most
It does not work for every disease involving these white blood cells.
Where it acts
Circulating and lymph-node B lymphocytes
Kind of result
The kind of result is not recorded
Supervision
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as protein.
FDA substance registry · 4F4X42SYQ6 · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
No recorded sentence describes the change this makes in a way that stands on its own. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
The limit a reviewer approved as the one that matters most here.
The four opening statements run to 93 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Protein
A protein is a folded chain your body builds to do a specific job.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A protein is like a tool bent into one shape for one task.
Where that stops being true. A tool keeps its shape. A protein can change shape and stop working.
What people get wrong. Protein in food and a protein in the body are related but not the same thing.
A polymer of amino acids folded into a defined structure that determines its function.
Enzyme
An enzyme is a protein that speeds up one chemical change.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
An enzyme is like a machine on a production line doing one cut.
Where that stops being true. A machine is switched on and off by a person. Enzymes are controlled by the cell.
What people get wrong. Enzymes are thought to be used up. They are not; they work again and again.
A catalytic protein that lowers the activation energy of a specific reaction.
Receptor
A receptor is a part of a cell that a signal fits into.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A receptor is like a lock waiting for one key.
Where that stops being true. A lock either opens or does not. A receptor can be half-triggered, or worn out.
What people get wrong. Fitting a receptor is read as causing a benefit. It causes a step, and nothing more.
A protein that binds a specific ligand and converts that binding into a cellular response.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Objective response rate in relapsed low-grade or follicular B-cell lymphoma
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
McLaughlin 1998 pivotal single-agent trial (conducted before ClinicalTrials.gov registration)
How many people
166
Study design
Phase 2 pivotal
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Single-arm; 48% response rate on intent-to-treat, no comparator p-value
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Intravenous infusion, or subcutaneous injection co-formulated with recombinant hyaluronidase
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
RNAWiki holds 4 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
■Living longer, or avoiding a major eventEvidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.16 registered measures of this kind. No reviewed result.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
□A number that stands in for healthNo evidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.No registered study measures this.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in Mouse, Rat. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
■Cells in a dishEvidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it changes in the body◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
The path through the body
From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.
Where a source records it acting
Immune and lymphatic system: Targets the CD20 antigen expressed on the surface of pre-B and mature B-lymphocytes; upon binding to CD20 it mediates B-cell lysis
US prescribing information · b172773b-3905-4a1c-ad95-bab4b6126563 · read 2026-08-28
Start
Rituximab
What a person takes: Intravenous infusion, or subcutaneous injection co-formulated with recombinant hyaluronidase.
The measurement behind this step
Given as 375 mg/m2 weekly in lymphoma, 1,000 mg twice two weeks apart in rheumatoid arthritis, with a stepped infusion rate and mandatory premedication.
Getting in
Slow first infusion to manage cytokine release
The first dose is given very slowly, because destroying a large number of B cells at once releases a wave of inflammatory signals that causes fever, chills and low blood pressure.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Standard dosing is 375 mg/m2 weekly in lymphoma or two 1,000 mg doses two weeks apart in autoimmune disease, with a stepped infusion rate and premedication with paracetamol, antihistamine and often a corticosteroid.
Reaching CD20 on B cells everywhere except the ends of the lineage
It finds B cells in blood, lymph nodes, spleen and bone marrow. Stem cells and fully mature antibody-producing plasma cells do not carry the badge, so they survive.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
CD20 is expressed from the late pre-B stage through the memory B cell, but not on haematopoietic stem cells, pro-B cells or terminally differentiated plasma cells. That expression window is what makes depletion recoverable and why long-lived humoral immunity is partly preserved.
The antibody grips a small exposed loop of the CD20 protein. CD20 is not shed and does not get internalised much, so the mark stays where it was placed.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Binds a discontinuous epitope on the large extracellular loop of the tetraspanning MS4A1 protein, driving CD20 into lipid rafts. Rituximab is a type I anti-CD20 antibody, which favours complement recruitment over the direct cell death that type II antibodies such as obinutuzumab preferentially cause.
Complement proteins punch holes in the coated cell, natural killer cells latch onto the antibody tail and destroy it, and macrophages swallow it whole.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
C1q binding to clustered Fc initiates the classical complement cascade and membrane attack complex formation; FcgammaRIIIa on natural killer cells drives antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity; FcgammaR-bearing macrophages in liver and spleen perform antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis. Direct apoptotic signalling contributes less for a type I antibody.
The B cell compartment empties, then slowly rebuilds
Circulating B cells disappear within days and stay away for six to twelve months. When they return they are often naive cells that do not carry the disease with them.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Peripheral B-cell depletion is typically complete within three days and recovery begins at six to nine months, with repopulation dominated by transitional and naive subsets. In autoimmune disease the reconstituted repertoire is frequently less autoreactive, which is the leading explanation for durable remission after a finite course.
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 5 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
progression free survival
overall survival
2 year overall survival rates
2 year progression free survival
time to disease progression
progression free survival at 1 year
progression free survival at 2 years
progression free survival at 5 years
overall survival at 2 years
overall survival at 5 years
and 6 more.
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (24)
overall response
overall response rate
determination of safety profile and response rates
time to treatment failure
response rate
response to treatment
response
objective response
disease response
engraftment
maximum tolerated dose
safety and efficacy
systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index
objective tumor response
complete response rate
graft failure
toxicity
grade 3 stomatitis
minimal residual disease
incidence of adverse experiences
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How long anything takes
Nine different lengths of time that get confused with each other. None of them is worked out from another.
Before anything is noticed.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before a test result moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before performance moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
How long the result was watched.No finished study window is recorded for a study that tested this substance.
How long people took it.How long people actually took it is not stored. The study window is not the same thing.
How long people were followed.Follow-up length is not stored separately. It is never read off the study window, which would be a different thing.
How fast the body clears it. 22 days (range, 6.1 to 52 days)
Read from the label, which states: “Based on a population pharmacokinetic analysis of data from 298 NHL patients who received rituximab once weekly or once every three weeks, the estimated median terminal elimination half-life was 22 days (range, 6.1 to 52 days).”
How long effects linger.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Beyond the studies. Nothing is recorded about the long term.
The longest finished study sets the edge of what anyone measured.
A study window is not how long people took it, and neither is how long they were followed. Where RNAWiki holds only one of the three, it shows one.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
People with CD20-positive B-cell lymphoma or leukaemia, and people with rheumatoid arthritis, ANCA-associated vasculitis or pemphigus not controlled by first-line therapy. It is also used off-label in multiple sclerosis, membranous nephropathy and other antibody-driven disease.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What the label states about particular groups
On pediatric, the label states: “The safety and effectiveness of RITUXAN have not been established in pediatric patients with CLL.”
US prescribing information · b172773b-3905-4a1c-ad95-bab4b6126563 · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “Diffuse Large B-Cell NHL Among patients with DLBCL evaluated in three randomized, active-controlled trials, 927 patients received RITUXAN in combination with chemotherapy.”
US prescribing information · b172773b-3905-4a1c-ad95-bab4b6126563 · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary Based on human data, RITUXAN can cause adverse developmental outcomes including B-cell lymphocytopenia in infants exposed to RITUXAN in-utero ( see Clinical Considerations ).”
US prescribing information · b172773b-3905-4a1c-ad95-bab4b6126563 · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “There are limited data on the presence of rituximab in human milk and the effect on the breastfed child, and there are no data on the effect on milk production.”
US prescribing information · b172773b-3905-4a1c-ad95-bab4b6126563 · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
EXPLORER and LUNAR both missed their primary endpoints in systemic lupus erythematosus and lupus nephritis
The chimeric construct retains murine variable domains, and human anti-chimeric antibodies remain a cause of infusion reactions and loss of response that fully humanised successors were built to avoid
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Given by a clinician
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Intravenous infusion, or subcutaneous injection co-formulated with recombinant hyaluronidase
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Suppression classes recorded: S1, S3, S4, S6.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Given as 375 mg/m2 weekly in lymphoma, 1,000 mg twice two weeks apart in rheumatoid arthritis, with a stepped infusion rate and mandatory premedication.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
·Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page
Boxed warnings for fatal infusion-related reactions, severe mucocutaneous reactions, hepatitis B reactivation and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. Hepatitis B screening before the first dose is mandatory.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction.
Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing.
The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete.
News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report.
A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Rituximab appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 43919 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
The recorded terms (10)
rheumatoid arthritis — 7974 reaction mentions
pain — 5694 reaction mentions
drug intolerance — 4439 reaction mentions
infusion related reaction — 4090 reaction mentions
arthralgia — 4067 reaction mentions
pneumonia — 3664 reaction mentions
joint swelling — 3622 reaction mentions
neutropenia — 3608 reaction mentions
febrile neutropenia — 3445 reaction mentions
treatment failure — 3316 reaction mentions
open-targets-adr · recorded 2026-06-24 · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Intravenous infusion, or subcutaneous injection co-formulated with recombinant hyaluronidase
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
21 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 19 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 63459-103 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as injection, solution, injection, solution, concentrate, liquid and solution, taken intravenous and subcutaneous.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 63459-103 · read 2026-08-29
The regulator's established pharmacologic class for it is cd20-directed antibody interactions [moa] and cd20-directed cytolytic antibody [epc].
FDA National Drug Code directory · 63459-103 · read 2026-08-29
4 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 3 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · b172773b-3905-4a1c-ad95-bab4b6126563 · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · b172773b-3905-4a1c-ad95-bab4b6126563 · read 2026-08-29
Rituxan is injection: solution in single-dose vials for intravenous infusion at 100 mg/10 mL (10 mg/mL) and 500 mg/50 mL (10 mg/mL) solution in single-dose vials, recorded as prescription product; fda label in effect 2025-01-06 in the United States.
US prescribing information · b172773b-3905-4a1c-ad95-bab4b6126563 · read 2026-08-28
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
Self-experiment planning is not offered for a prescription or clinician-supervised medicine. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Rituximab studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Claims that go past the evidence
Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.
✗Goes past the evidence
That B-cell depletion helps in any B-cell-mediated disease; lupus is the counterexample where two randomised trials failed
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That widespread off-label use in multiple sclerosis and membranous nephropathy reflects randomised evidence for rituximab specifically rather than for the class
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Rituximab are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.
McLaughlin 1998: a 48% response rate as a single agent in relapsed indolent lymphoma
In plain words
The trial that made rituximab the first antibody approved for cancer. Just under half of 166 patients with relapsed low-grade lymphoma responded to four weekly infusions, with mostly mild toxicity.
What was measured
Objective response rate 48% on intent-to-treat
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Multi-institutional trial across 31 centres, 166 patients on intent-to-treat, four weekly doses of 375 mg/m2. Response rate 48%, median time to progression for responders 13.0 months at 11.8 months median follow-up. Grade 3 toxicity in 12% and grade 4 in 3%, mostly first-infusion fever and chills. Only one patient developed a human anti-chimeric antibody.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
R-CHOP: adding rituximab to chemotherapy improved survival in aggressive lymphoma
In plain words
In 399 patients aged 60 to 80 with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, adding the antibody to standard chemotherapy raised complete response from 63% to 76% and lengthened both event-free and overall survival.
What was measured
Complete response 76% versus 63%, p = 0.005
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Randomised trial, 197 patients to eight cycles of CHOP and 202 to CHOP plus rituximab. Complete response 76% versus 63% (p = 0.005). At median follow-up of two years, event-free and overall survival were both significantly higher in the rituximab arm, without a clinically significant increase in toxicity. R-CHOP has been the global standard of care since.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
EXPLORER and LUNAR: rituximab failed its two randomised trials in lupus
In plain words
B cells are central to lupus and rituximab depletes B cells, so it was expected to work. Two properly designed randomised trials, one in general lupus and one in lupus kidney disease, both failed to beat placebo.
What was measured
No difference from placebo on primary or secondary endpoints in either trial
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
EXPLORER randomised 257 patients with moderately-to-severely active extrarenal systemic lupus erythematosus 2:1 to rituximab or placebo on aggressive background immunosuppression, and found no difference on the primary or secondary BILAG endpoints. LUNAR tested rituximab added to mycophenolate and steroids in proliferative lupus nephritis and likewise missed its primary renal response endpoint. Rituximab is nonetheless widely used off-label in refractory lupus on the strength of uncontrolled series, which is precisely the gap this record exists to mark.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
From cancer drug to autoimmune platform, and then to a target obinutuzumab and ocrelizumab improved on
In plain words
Rituximab was designed for lymphoma. Its success in rheumatoid arthritis and vasculitis reframed B-cell depletion as a general autoimmune strategy, and its off-label success in multiple sclerosis directly motivated ocrelizumab, a humanised successor that was then tested properly.
What was measured
Not recorded
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Approval sequence ran from non-Hodgkin lymphoma in 1997 to rheumatoid arthritis in 2006 and ANCA-associated vasculitis in 2011. Off-label multiple sclerosis use, supported by a positive phase 2 trial that was never taken to phase 3 by the sponsor, provided the rationale for ocrelizumab, which was developed to registration. The shift is instructive: a widely used off-label indication was eventually resolved by developing a different molecule rather than by testing the original one.
Source
Sequence of FDA approvals for RITUXAN BLA 103705 and the ocrelizumab development programme
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Hepatitis B reactivation and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy carry boxed warnings
In plain words
Wiping out B cells removes part of the defence against viruses the body was already holding in check. Hepatitis B can reactivate and cause fatal liver failure, and a rare brain infection has occurred.
What was measured
Not recorded
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The label carries boxed warnings for fatal infusion-related reactions, severe mucocutaneous reactions, hepatitis B virus reactivation with fulminant hepatitis and death, and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy caused by JC virus. Hepatitis B serology screening before treatment is mandatory, and hypogammaglobulinaemia after repeated courses is common and sometimes prolonged.
Source
RITUXAN US Prescribing Information, boxed warning and Warnings and Precautions
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
4F4X42SYQ6
RxNorm concept
121191
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✓ Passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries the origin: Reviewed first-read answer.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✓ Passed
Safety mode resolved
Suppression classes recorded: S1, S3, S4, S6.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How this medicine reached us
Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.
What the approval register records
2 approved applications cover products containing this substance. The earliest was BLA103705, approved 19971126 to GENENTECH.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
4 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record
Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.
The first therapeutic monoclonal antibody approved for cancer: adding it to CHOP chemotherapy raised complete response in elderly diffuse large B-cell lymphoma from 63% to 76% and lengthened overall survival.
Recorded evidence blocks (12)
Q2
What did Rituximab's largest trial (7500 people) and its longest (31 years) measure?
7500 people in Rituximab's largest registered study, 31 years in its longest registered window, measuring Treatment Related Mortality (TRM). ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
1105 phase2, 459 phase1, 383 phase3, 65 phase4, 61 na or unstated, 55 na, 17 early phase1; NCT00001337; 2024-05-24; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2026, NCT04585893.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Rituximab was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
phase2
1105
phase1
459
phase3
383
phase4
65
na or unstated
61
na
55
2 more recorded rows
early phase1
17
Last recorded human testNCT04585893
2026-06-07
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
From mouse to human: where has Rituximab shown lifespan?
12 recorded entries; human; infusion, IV; also "Rituximab 375 mg/m^2 by infusion on day 1, cycle 1. Repeated every 28 days.", "Rituximab 375 mg/m2", "375 mg/m2 RRituximab"
Show the evidence
human
NCT00001586
infusion; Rituximab 375 mg/m^2 by infusion on day 1, cycle 1. Repeated every 28 days.
NCT00225212
Rituximab 375 mg/m2
NCT00379587
375 mg/m2 RRituximab
NCT00842595
IV; (Mabthera ® )Rituximab IV 375 mg/m²day
NCT01181154
rituximab (Mabthera®)1000 mg at day 1 and day 15
NCT01644253
20 mg/kg TRU-016 + Rituximab
6 more recorded rows
humanNCT01644253
10 mg/kg TRU-016 + Rituximab
humanNCT01644253
TRU-016 6-20 mg/kg + idelalisib + rituximab
humanNCT05116228
Mabthera 500mg
humanNCT05116228
Mabthera 1000mg
humanNCT06642909
Zuberitamab 600mg
humanNCT06642909
Zuberitamab 1000mg
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Rituximab's half-life is 22 days (range, 6.1 to 52 days) — which schedules were studied?
22 days (range, 6.1 to 52 days), the half-life Rituximab's label states. openfda-label · f941fc61-f7a3-4e4a-ab7c-87c1667fa05b · 2026-08-28
Show the evidence
half life
22 days (range, 6.1 to 52 days); Based on a population pharmacokinetic analysis of data from 298 NHL patients who received rituximab once weekly or once every three weeks, the estimated median terminal elimination half-life was 22 days (range, 6.1 to 52 days).
recorded 2026-08-28 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q7
Which of 2 year overall survival rates, 2 year progression free survival and complete remission rate after induction did Rituximab's trials measure?
2 year overall survival rates, 2 year progression free survival and complete remission rate after induction lead 40 outcome terms across Rituximab's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
determination of safety profile and response rates, time to treatment failure, overall survival, response rate, 2 year overall survival rates and 2 year progression free survival follow.
Show the evidence
overall response
1
progression free survival
1
overall response rate
1
determination of safety profile and response rates
1
time to treatment failure
1
overall survival
1
14 more recorded rows
response rate
1
2 year overall survival rates
1
2 year progression free survival
1
response to treatment
1
response
1
time to disease progression
1
progression free survival at 1 year
1
progression free survival at 2 years
1
progression free survival at 5 years
1
overall survival at 2 years
1
overall survival at 5 years
1
objective response
1
disease response
1
engraftment
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Which of Rituximab's 438 ongoing trials reports first?
Describe natural history; Efficacy of rituximab on achievement of complete response after therapy with cladribine; latest 2043-07-31
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00092222
"Virotherapy and Natural History Study of KHSV-Associated Multricentric Castleman s Disease With Correlates of Disease Activity"; n 75; "Describe natural history"; 2026-10-01
NCT00412594
"Cladribine and Rituximab in Treating Patients With Hairy Cell Leukemia"; n 150; "Efficacy of rituximab on achievement of complete response after therapy with cladribine"; 2027-06-30
NCT00492050
"Bortezomib and Rituximab for Patients With Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia"; n 46; "Response Rate After 2 Cycles of Treatment With Bortezomib and Rituximab"; 2026-06-28
NCT00692939
"Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation for Crohn's Disease"; n 20; "Number of participants with regimen-related toxicities."; 2027-12
NCT00923013
"Cladribine With Simultaneous or Delayed Rituximab to Treat Hairy Cell Leukemia"; n 175; "Response Rate Comparing Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) at 6 Months After Start of Treatment in Comparison Groups"; 2030-01-31
NCT00972478
"Vorinostat, Rituximab, and Combination Chemotherapy in Treating Patients With Newly Diagnosed Stage II, Stage III, or Stage IV Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma"; n 83; "Safe Dose of Vorinostat to be Used in Combination With R-CHOP Assessed by CTCAE Version 4.0 (Phase I)"; 2027-03-06
14 further recorded trials
NCT01046825
"Mature B-Cell Lymphoma And Leukemia Study III"; n 128; "Gene Differential Expression Profiling of Burkitt Lymphoma (BL) vs. Non-BL in the US and Other Selected Geographic Regions of the World"; 2027-08
NCT01059786
"Randomized Phase II Trial of Rituximab With Either Pentostatin or Bendamustine for Multiply Relapsed or Refractory Hairy Cell Leukemia"; n 69; "Number of Participants Receiving Pentostatin + Rituximab and Bendamustine + Rituximab Who Achieve a Complete Remission (CR) + Partial Response (PR)"; 2031-06-30
NCT01318317
"Genetically Engineered Lymphocyte Therapy After Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplant in Treating Patients With High-Risk, Intermediate-Grade, B-cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma"; n 8; "Number of Participants With Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLTs)"; 2027-02-24
NCT01371630
"Inotuzumab Ozogamicin and Combination Chemotherapy in Treating Patients With Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia"; n 276; "Maximum tolerated dose of inotuzumab ozogamicin based on incidence of dose limiting toxicities (Phase I)"; 2027-12-25
NCT01415752
"Rituximab, Bendamustine Hydrochloride, and Bortezomib Followed by Rituximab and Lenalidomide in Treating Older Patients With Previously Untreated Mantle Cell Lymphoma"; n 373; "Progression-free Survival (PFS) for Induction Phase"; 2031-09
NCT01419561
"Natural History Study of the KSHV Inflammatory Cytokine Syndrome (KICS)"; n 140; "Natural history of KICS"; 2028-12-31
NCT01424982
"Combination Chemotherapy and Ponatinib Hydrochloride in Treating Patients With Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia"; n 88; "Event-free survival"; 2027-10-31
NCT01446133
"Combination of Lenalidomide and Rituximab in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma (CLL-SLL)"; n 120; "Overall Response Rate"; 2028-06-30
NCT01473628
"Radiation Therapy and Rituximab in Treating Patients With Stage I-II Grade 1 or Grade 2 Follicular Lymphoma"; n 81; "Proportion of patients that remain progression free, defined as progressive disease or death due to disease"; 2027-05-20
NCT01479842
"Rituxan/Bendamustine/PCI-32765 in Relapsed DLBCL, MCL, or Indolent Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma"; n 48; "Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) as determined by the incidence of dose limiting toxicities (DLT) of BTK inhibitor PCI-32765 when given in combination with rituximab and bendamustine hydrochloride"; 2026-12-01
NCT01661881
"Rituximab/Bendamustine + Rituximab/Cytarabine for Mantle Cell Lymphoma"; n 23; "Complete Remission (CR) Rate After 6 Cycles"; 2030-04
NCT01695941
"Alisertib, Bortezomib, and Rituximab in Treating Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma or B-cell Low Grade Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma"; n 24; "Recommended phase II dose of alisertib when combined with bortezomib and rituximab, defined as the highest dose level at which < 33% of the dose cohort experience a dose limiting toxicity (DLT)"; 2027-03-03
NCT01829568
"Rituximab, Lenalidomide, and Ibrutinib in Treating Patients With Previously Untreated Stage II-IV Follicular Lymphoma"; n 33; "Maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of lenalidomide and ibrutinib for combination with rituximab"; 2027-06-06
NCT01829958
"Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment to Predict Toxic Events in Older Patients With Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma With Imbedded Pilot Study of Pre-Phase Therapy"; n 201; "Toxicity Assessment"; 2027-04
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
Which running trial of Rituximab could settle lifespan?
NCT04737889 measures 2-year progression-free survival, reading out 2026-01-13.
98 open trials; n 30; "Rituximab, Lenalidomide Combined With Methotrexate and Temozolomide For Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma"
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT04737889
"Rituximab, Lenalidomide Combined With Methotrexate and Temozolomide For Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma"; n 30; "2-year progression-free survival"; 2026-01-13
NCT04594798
"A Study of Polatuzumab Vedotin, Rituximab and Dose Attenuated CHP in Older Patients With DLBCL"; n 39; "Progression Free Survival"; 2026-07-31
NCT05581030
"CalPeg for Newly Diagnosed Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL)"; n 7; "Mortality Rate of Hyper-CVAD after first infusion of calaspargase pegol"; 2026-10
NCT02048813
"Ibrutinib and Rituximab Compared With Fludarabine Phosphate, Cyclophosphamide, and Rituximab in Treating Patients With Untreated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia or Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma"; n 529; "Progression-free Survival (PFS) Rate at 3 Years"; 2026-10-09
NCT05886036
"Comparing the Effectiveness of the Immunotherapy Agents Rituximab or Mosunetuzumab in Patients With Nodular Lymphocyte-Predominant Hodgkin Lymphoma, NORM Trial"; n 70; "Progression-free survival (PFS) time"; 2026-10-31
NCT02877303
"Blinatumomab, Inotuzumab Ozogamicin, and Combination Chemotherapy as Frontline Therapy in Treating Patients With B Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia"; n 80; "Relapse-free survival (RFS)"; 2026-11-01
14 further recorded trials
NCT05850546
"Rituximab in the First Episode of Paediatric Nephrotic Syndrome"; n 138; "1-year relapse-free survival rate"; 2026-12-28
NCT05506410
"A Clinical Study of Hanlikang and BTK Inhibitors in the Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Mantle Cell Lymphoma"; n 100; "progression free survival（PFS）"; 2026-12-30
NCT01856192
"Rituximab and Combination Chemotherapy With or Without Lenalidomide in Treating Patients With Newly Diagnosed Stage II-IV Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma"; n 349; "3-year Progression-free Survival Rate"; 2026-12-31
NCT03749018
"Nivolumab With DA-REPOCH Chemotherapy Regimen in Treating Patients With Aggressive B-Cell Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma"; n 30; "Progression-free survival (PFS)"; 2026-12-31
NCT04216524
"Venetoclax, SL-401, and Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Blastic Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cell Neoplasm"; n 40; "Progression free survival (PFS)"; 2026-12-31
NCT04404283
"Brentuximab Vedotin Plus Lenalidomide and Rituximab for the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory DLBCL"; n 239; "Overall survival (OS)"; 2026-12-31
NCT04759586
"Nivolumab in Combination With Chemo-Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Primary Mediastinal B-Cell Lymphoma"; n 244; "Progression-free survival (PFS)"; 2026-12-31
NCT05221645
"Pembrolizumab in Combination With R-ICE Chemotherapy in Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma"; n 65; "To establish the event-free survival at 1 year in patients treated with P+R-ICE"; 2026-12-31
NCT04075292
"Study of Acalabrutinib Versus Chlorambucil Plus Rituximab in Adult Subjects With Previously Untreated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia"; n 155; "Progression Free Survival (PFS) Assessed by BICR"; 2027-01-01
NCT04421560
"Pembrolizumab, Ibrutinib and Rituximab in PCNSL"; n 37; "Progression-free survival rate 6 months (PFS6)"; 2027-01-05
NCT03267433
"Rituximab With or Without Stem Cell Transplant in Treating Patients With Minimal Residual Disease-Negative Mantle Cell Lymphoma in First Complete Remission"; n 689; "Overall survival (OS) in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients in minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative complete remission (CR) who undergo auto-hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) followed by rituximab versus (vs.) maintenance…"; 2027-01-31
NCT05736419
"A Study of Immune Suppression Treatment for People With Sickle Cell Disease or β-Thalassemia Who Are Going to Receive an Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (HCT)"; n 24; "Number of participants with treatment related mortality/TRM or primary graft failure"; 2027-02-09
NCT02972840
"A Study of BR Alone Versus in Combination With Acalabrutinib in Subjects With Previously Untreated MCL"; n 635; "Progression-free survival per the Lugano Classification for NHL in Arm 1 compared to Arm 2"; 2027-02-15
NCT04529772
"A Combination of Acalabrutinib With R-CHOP in Subjects With Previously Untreated Non-GCB DLBCL (ACE-LY-312)"; n 611; "Progression-free survival (PFS) per the Lugano Classification for NHL in Arm A compared to Arm B"; 2027-02-22
Q10
Which 402 trials of Rituximab posted no result?
Posted no result
402 of 402 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00001805, NCT00003280, NCT00003356, NCT00005631, NCT00003397 and NCT00004112, and 396 more
Completion dates
oldest 2000-06; newest 2024-08-31
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00001805
2000-06
NCT00003280
2002-03
NCT00003356
2002-05
NCT00005631
2002-11
NCT00003397
2002-12
NCT00004112
2003-03-01
14 further recorded trials
NCT00004260
2003-06
NCT00026351
2003-06
NCT00005609
2004-02
NCT00003554
2004-04
NCT00059904
2004-06
NCT02693210
2004-08
NCT00136552
2004-12
NCT00003963
2005-02
NCT01851551
2005-04
NCT00293072
2005-05
NCT00001563
2005-05-05
NCT00004889
2005-07
NCT00062296
2005-08
NCT00072592
2005-08
Q11
At the median, Rituximab's trials enrolled 46 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
46
Largest enrolment
7500
Registered trials counted
1859
Q12
What do 43919 spontaneous reports say about Rituximab — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Rituximab appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 43919 reaction mentions were counted: rheumatoid arthritis 7974; pain 5694; drug intolerance 4439; infusion related reaction 4090. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL1201576 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
rheumatoid arthritis
7974
pain
5694
drug intolerance
4439
infusion related reaction
4090
arthralgia
4067
pneumonia
3664
4 more recorded rows
joint swelling
3622
neutropenia
3608
febrile neutropenia
3445
treatment failure
3316
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q13
What is recorded about Rituximab and autophagy?
"In vitro experiments using Rituximab-sensitive and -resistant DLBCL cell lines (Raji and Raji-4RH) demonstrated that Chidamide significantly inhibited cell proliferation in a dose- and time-dependent manner, induced G0/G1 phase arrest, and enhanced autophagy." — where Rituximab and autophagy appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2026-04-28
"In vitro experiments using Rituximab-sensitive and -resistant DLBCL cell lines (Raji and Raji-4RH) demonstrated that Chidamide significantly inhibited cell proliferation in a dose- and time-dependent manner, induced G0/G1 phase arrest, and enhanced autophagy."
mTORPMID 41678298
"The most common regimens and response rates for late T-cell-mediated rejection, chronic ductopenic rejection, acute antibody- mediated rejection, and chronic antibody-mediated rejection were high-dose steroids and adjusting baseline immunosuppression (55%-100%), adjusting baseline immunosuppression with or without an mTOR inhibitor (25%-52%), high-dose steroids, plasma exchange or plasmapheresis…"
IGF-1PMID 42047347
"Emerging therapies, including rituximab (anti-CD20), teprotumumab (anti-IGF-1 R), and SYD5115 (TSH-R antagonist), target specific immune pathways."
mTORPMID 41615270
"A clinical protocol including testing donors and recipients, monitoring for DNAemia in recipients at risk, switching CNI to mTOR inhibitors, treatment with antivirals, and rituximab for KICS may mitigate the impact of HHV-8/KSHV infection in SOT recipients."
IGF-1PMID 40396469
"Traditional treatments, such as corticosteroids and rituximab, exhibit variable efficacy, while targeted therapies like teprotumumab, an insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor (IGF-1 R) inhibitor, have shown promise, particularly in the United States."
mTORPMID 40614821
"Corticosteroids were significantly associated with three out of four endpoints: tacrolimus and anti-thymocyte globulin with two, and tacrolimus levels, blood group ABO-incompatible transplantation, rituximab, mycophenolate mofetil, mTOR inhibitors, and ureteral stents with one each."
autophagy
PMID 30123222
"Methylthiazolyldiphenyl-tetrazolium bromide (MTT) was used to detect growth inhibition in B-cell lymphoma cell lines, Ramos and Daudi cells, which were treated by Rituximab-MMAE alone or combined with autophagy conditioner."
PMID 30123222
"Apoptosis was detected by flow cytometry and immunohistochemistry, and apoptosis inhibitor was employed to discover the relationship between autophagy and apoptosis during the Rituximab-MMAE treatment."
IGF-1
"Other options are teprotumumab (IGF-1 receptor Inhibitor), and rituximab or orbital decompression surgery/external orbital radiation."
recorded 2026-04-28 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ChEMBL ATC CC BY-SA · ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 5 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Most important common problem, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 10 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.